How To Improve Education In The Netherlands

Transcription

1 OECD Reviews of Migrant Education NETHERLANDS Claire Shewbridge, Moonhee Kim, Gregory Wurzburg and Gaby Hostens February 2010

2 ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT The OECD is a unique forum where the governments of 30 democracies work together to address the economic, social and environmental challenges of globalisation. The OECD is also at the forefront of efforts to understand and to help governments respond to new developments and concerns, such as corporate governance, the information economy and the challenges of an ageing population. The Organisation provides a setting where governments can compare policy experiences, seek answers to common problems, identify good practice and work to co-ordinate domestic and international policies. The OECD member countries are: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The Commission of the European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD. This work is published on the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and the arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Organisation or of the governments of its member countries. OECD 2009 No translation of this document may be made without written permission. Applications should be sent to rights@oecd.org.

3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS - 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This policy review of migrant education in the Netherlands would not have been possible without the support of the national authority and the stakeholders involved. The OECD Secretariat would like to extend particular thanks to Liesbeth van Welie and Hans Stegeman for their valuable guidance and advice and efficient organisation of the review. We would also like to thank all those who gave their time during our visits to inform the review team of their views, experiences and knowledge and to respond to our many questions.

4

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS - 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS... 7 CHAPTER 1: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANTS AND MIGRANT EDUCATION OECD Review of Migrant Education Summary of the position of immigrants in the Netherlands Recent immigration trends Immigrant population Languages Performance and participation in education and identification of priorities A comparison of selected systems Early childhood education and care (ECEC) Compulsory education Transition to tertiary education Priority groups Designing policies for migrant education Important characteristics of the Dutch education system Focus on educational disadvantage Universal and targeted measures to benefit immigrant students NOTES REFERENCES CHAPTER 2: POLICIES TO IMPROVE MIGRANT EDUCATION Introduction System management Balancing school choice, equity and integration Ensuring monitoring and evaluation Early childhood education and care Ensuring early intervention Schools and communities The quality of teaching and learning environments Preventing drop out Effective partnership and engagement NOTES REFERENCES ANNEX A: TERMS OF REFERENCE NOTES ANNEX B: POLICY REVIEW VISIT OF THE NETHERLANDS NOTES... 77

6 6 - TABLE OF CONTENTS Tables Table 1.1. Employment rates by educational attainment Table 1.2. Level of education for native Dutch and immigrants Table 1.3. Geographical distribution of non-western immigrants in the Netherlands Table 1.4. Overview of selected education systems Table 1.5. Participation in early childhood education and care (VVE) by immigrant group Table 1.6. Age of entry into education for second-generation Turkish immigrants Table 1.7. Reading performance in the fourth grade of primary school Table 1.8. Intended instruction time in primary and secondary education Table 1.9. Participation in different educational tracks in the third grade of secondary education Table Reading performance at age Table New dropouts, by immigrant background (2007/08) Table Transition to higher levels of education, by immigrant background Table Participation in higher education for second-generation Turkish immigrants Table 2.1. New school dropouts, 2001/02 to 2010/ Table 2.2. Dropout rate (public and private schools, 2005/06) Figures Figure 1.1. Average employment/population ratio and unemployment rate Figure 1.2. Students' socio-economic background at age 15, by immigrant status Figure 1.3. Reading performance at age 15 and socio-economic and language differences Figure 1.4. Time spent learning the language of instruction at age 15, by immigrant status Figure 2.1. Educational provisions for children aged 0 to 12 years Boxes Box 1.1. OECD Review of Migrant Education Box 1.2. School choice and autonomy Box 2.1. Segregation and concentration in the Netherlands Box 2.2. Quality assurance: the role of inspection Box 2.3. Policy options: system management Box 2.4. Policy options: early childhood education and care Box 2.5. Continuous language development in Germany: the FörMig project Box 2.6. Policy options: schools and communities... 59

7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS - 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Sixteen percent of the young Dutch population has a non-western immigrant background, and education is of key importance to their future success. Immigrants with low levels of education are at a severe disadvantage in the Dutch labour market compared to their native peers and this gap is far more pronounced than in the OECD on average. At particular risk are many young adults with non-western immigrant background who have low levels of education. In 2008, 16% of all young people aged 20 and below had non-western immigrant background and the majority originated from Turkey, Morocco, Surinam or the Antilles. The population with non- Western background is largely concentrated in the West of the Netherlands, notably, 39% reside in Rotterdam, Amsterdam, The Hague or Utrecht (compared to 13% of the total Dutch population). This residential concentration is to a certain extent mirrored in schools in the four major cities although other factors such as parental choice and for secondary schools academic selection also contribute to the student composition in schools. Measured results of primary schooling outcomes for students with non- Western immigrant background have been improving over recent years. In international comparison, Dutch primary school students with an immigrant background perform well. There have been marked improvements in primary schooling outcomes over recent years for young students with non-western immigrant background, but on average they only perform around the level of the least advantaged native Dutch students. Accordingly, at age 12 students with non-western immigrant background are overrepresented among those pursuing (pre)vocational studies. However over the years many have pursued the longer route via vocational education to higher education more so than their native peers. Secondary schooling outcomes are mixed for students with non-western immigrant background. International evidence shows marked average performance differences at age 15 between secondgeneration immigrant students and native Dutch students along with Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany and Luxembourg, these are the most pronounced in the OECD. This is reflected in national statistics for dropout rates in secondary education: among the new dropouts in 2007/08, 27% had a non- Western immigrant background although such students represented only 16% of all students participating in secondary education. However, transition rates to university are very high for students with non-western immigrant background who complete pre-university education (VWO). The challenge is to increase their access to such education: among students in the third grade of secondary education in 2008/09, 13% of students with non-western immigrant background participated in VWO, compared to 23% of native Dutch students. Dutch policy for migrant education emphasises universal policies to improve education for disadvantaged students. Immigrant students with non-western background are expected to benefit from educational policies to improve equity including, notably, extra funding to primary schools with students from disadvantaged background and to secondary schools for students living in deprived areas. There are also preschool and early school programmes targeting children from disadvantaged background, as well as policies to correct

8 8 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS for early selection into different school types at age 12 and to ensure that students achieve basic qualification. Specific measures for migrant education include funding to secondary schools for newly arrived immigrants, agreements to reduce segregation between native Dutch and immigrant students in primary schools, induction classes offering intensive Dutch lessons to newly arrived immigrant students and the creation of specific platforms for ethnic minority parents. There is scope to raise the quality of under-performing schools and enhance immigrant families means to exercise school choice. In the Netherlands, there is political support to limit segregation and concentration in education and commitment to build knowledge on effective measures. However, it has proven difficult to sustain efforts to combat segregation and concentration in schools and there is evidence that parental choice has led to increased levels. Another notable challenge is ensuring access to high quality primary education in Amsterdam, The Hague, Rotterdam and Utrecht where between 10 and 20% of primary schools were classified as underperforming in In this context, the OECD sees a strengthened role for the Education Inspectorate to monitor and ensure the quality of schooling, evaluating specifically school ability to close performance gaps between native and immigrant students (including subgroups of immigrants with non-western background). Further, consideration should be given to lowering the threshold for initiating corrective action in under-performing schools. In parallel, there is room to enhance for immigrant families, as well as socio-economically disadvantaged families, the means to exercise school choice. This could include the provision of clear and timely information on school choice and enrolment, including the dates and procedures for school enrolment, in clear accessible language and in selected foreign languages. Another option is to encourage co-operation among schools and school boards at the secondary level of education to ensure a more even distribution in enrolment of immigrant students. There is also scope to strengthen the use of monitoring and evaluation practices within schools and at the system level. The Netherlands places high value on evidence-based policy making and is in a strong position to monitor the outcomes of immigrant students with a rich national data set and participation in international surveys. There have also been several initiatives to promote the use of monitoring student progress in schools, e.g. including a criterion of use of data and results in the inspection of primary schools and introducing a financial incentive for secondary school leaders to monitor and prevent drop out at their schools. The challenge in pushing forward this agenda primarily lies with the fact that not all school leaders and teachers have the necessary training to make effective use of monitoring and evaluation. The OECD sees scope to work with teacher training institutions and the national educational advisory centres to take stock of existing instruments and teacher training to monitor student progress and to make such information available on a systematic basis to teachers and school leaders, e.g. through pre- and in-service training. School initiatives to improve staff competency in use of monitoring tools should be evaluated. Further, existing statistical information can be reclassified and analysed to monitor emerging issues of the integration of new immigrant groups in the Netherlands. There is also scope to evaluate the adequacy of actual weighting schemes in ensuring that schools have sufficient resources and to monitor how they use these. Efforts to provide young children with non-western immigrant background adequate opportunity to develop social and Dutch skills can be enhanced. The Netherlands introduced preschool and early-school education programmes (VVE) in 2000 to combat educational disadvantage at an early age. While this initiative has been promising in increasing participation in ECEC of young immigrant children from disadvantaged backgrounds, challenges remain to capitalise on the potential that this offers. Research shows only modest positive effects of ECEC participation and no effects for young children with Turkish or Moroccan low-education backgrounds. The

9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS - 9 OECD sees scope to strengthen the existing VVE programmes by complementing enrolment targets with quality targets. For example, by ensuring that teachers in preschool programmes with high proportions of immigrant children have access to in-service training to effectively care for linguistically and culturally diverse children and by setting minimum qualification requirements for ECEC staff. In parallel, major stakeholders need to continue their efforts to engage immigrant parents, to achieve the government s target for 100% participation of disadvantaged children in VVE by Schools and communities play a key role in improving migrant education. In the Netherlands, there is political support to raise teachers and school leaders competencies and qualifications in all schools (e.g. the action plan on teachers to improve staff remuneration and professional enhancement) and to improve all students language and arithmetic skills (e.g. common standards for literacy and numeracy and plans to introduce performance reference levels in 2010). Efforts to increase targeted support to students include the recent introduction of induction classes for newly arrived immigrants in secondary schools and many municipality and school initiatives to offer additional language support activities. However, there are major challenges to attract teachers to schools in disadvantaged areas and to build teacher and school leader capacity to meet diverse individual students needs. The OECD encourages continued prioritisation of recruitment and retention of high quality teachers to schools in disadvantaged areas and suggests that prioritising training and professional development within these schools will help to attract the brightest candidates from teaching colleges. For teachers in schools with high proportions of immigrant students, in-service training in the second language acquisition theory and practice is strongly recommended and the implementation of this could be monitored by the Inspectorate. Consideration should also be given to setting minimum qualifications for school leaders to ensure their ability to lead in a multicultural environment. Further, the OECD encourages the Netherlands to pursue a long-term policy to recruit more school leaders and teachers with immigrant background and to ensure adequate support to immigrant students in teaching programmes. As part of the political goal to reduce the number of young people leaving education without basic qualification, there has been increased provision of support and guidance services at school, including Care and Advice Teams and mentor programmes. Plus, there are regional and municipal initiatives to target transitions that are challenging for many students, e.g. from lower vocational (VMBO) to upper vocational (MBO) programmes. However, the toughest challenges are to retain students in the one year MBO programmes and to promote successful participation of students with a non-western immigrant background in apprenticeship-type vocational programmes. As such, the OECD recommends the implementation of Care and Advice Teams in vocational schools as priority, particularly those in disadvantaged areas, and supports the further development of systems to report absenteeism. Another policy option is for the Government, municipalities and vocational schools to work together with business partners and local communities (especially ethnic minority communities) to establish apprenticeships. There is also a role for the Council for Vocational Education (MBO-Raad) to promote support to written and academic Dutch skills throughout vocational schools. In the Netherlands, there is increasing recognition of the importance of engaging immigrant parents as partners in education, with notably the Platform for Ethnic Minority Parents and Education (PAOO) playing a leading role in this along with local platforms in 30 large municipalities. There are also established partnerships among schools, communities and other welfare partners to offer extended support to parents and students. The OECD sees scope to enhance the involvement of immigrant parents in official school/parent partnerships by taking a more proactive approach, for example school boards reserving places for them, schools developing plans for parental involvement and the government supporting municipality initiatives in this area and promoting effective ones. There is also room to focus existing initiatives on providing educational support to disadvantaged students, e.g. by extending homework support and access to computers and libraries in community schools.

10

11 CHAPTER 1: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANT AND MIGRANT EDUCATION - 11 CHAPTER 1 SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANTS AND MIGRANT EDUCATION This chapter identifies successes and challenges for immigrants and migrant education in the Netherlands. An analysis of performance and participation in education identifies immigrants with non-western background as a priority group. Although these students have made significant educational gains over recent years they remain at an educational disadvantage on average compared to their counterparts. The chapter presents an overview of Dutch policies for migrant education which emphasise universal equity and quality policies but include some specific measures targeting immigrant students.

12 12 - CHAPTER 1: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANT AND MIGRANT EDUCATION OECD Review of Migrant Education This review is one of a series of policy reviews of migrant education in OECD countries (see Box 1.1) and follows the policy evaluation framework established for the OECD Review of Migrant Education. However, policy challenges and priority issues for immigrant students vary from country to country. To this end, each country was invited to tailor the focus of the policy review in consultation with the OECD Secretariat in order to ensure that the immediate output of the review will meet the specific needs of the country. This policy review of the Netherlands presents selected policy options designed to respond to high priority issues and supported by evidence and research or other country practices. (See Annex A for the Terms of Reference and Annex B for the visit programmes). Box 1.1. OECD Review of Migrant Education The OECD launched the Review of Migrant Education in January The scope of the project includes pre-school, primary school, and secondary school. The overarching question of the review is what policies will promote successful education outcomes for first- and second-generation immigrant students 1? Education outcomes are defined as follows: Access Whether immigrant students have the same access to quality education as their native peers; and if not, what policies may facilitate or hinder their access. Participation Whether immigrant students may drop out more easily or leave school earlier than their native peers; and if so, what policies may influence immigrant students completion of schooling. Performance Whether immigrant students perform as well as their native peers; and if not, what policies may effectively raise immigrant students performance at school, especially for those from low socio-economic background? The project consists of two strands of activities: analytical work and country policy reviews. Analytical work draws on evidence from all OECD countries. It includes an international questionnaire on migrant policies, reviews previous OECD work and academic literature regarding migrant education, and explores statistical data from PISA and other sources. Country policy reviews aim to provide country-specific policy recommendations. Reviews are being conducted in Austria, Denmark, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden. Each participating country has prepared a Country Background Report based on common OECD guidelines. The results of both the analytical work and country policy reviews will feed into the final report of the OECD Review of Migrant Education. 1 First-generation immigrant students were born outside the country of assessment and their parents were also born in a different country. Second-generation immigrant students were born in the country of assessment but their parents were born in a different country, i.e. they have followed all their pre-school/schooling in the country of assessment. This Review should be read in conjunction with the Country Background Report prepared by the Dutch authorities (Herweijer, 2009).

13 CHAPTER 1: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANT AND MIGRANT EDUCATION - 13 Summary of the position of immigrants in the Netherlands Where possible, this section presents comparable information for immigrants in the Flemish Community of Belgium and Germany (see Annex A). Recent immigration trends Arrival of new immigrant groups in the Netherlands Over recent years, there has been a decline in the number of immigrants coming from traditional sending countries such as Turkey and Morocco. On average, over the period from 1995 to 2005, 7% of all immigrants came from Turkey and 5% from Morocco, but this was 4% and 2.5% of all immigrants in 2006, respectively (OECD, 2008a). The two largest groups in 2006 were immigrants from Germany and Poland (each around 10% of all immigrants), and immigrants from the United States, China and India were among the top ten nationalities. A similar trend is observed in Germany, where 5% of new immigrants came from Turkey (a decline from an average of 8% over the previous ten years), but 27% came from Poland. However, in Belgium, 9% of new immigrants came from Morocco and 4% from Turkey, representing only a slight decline from the average of the previous ten years. Despite the decline in numbers of new immigrants from the traditional sending countries, 47% of immigrants in 2006 entered with family permits. This is a larger proportion than in Germany (23%) and Belgium (35%). Notably, in the Netherlands, 24% of immigrants entered with humanitarian permits in 2006 a much higher proportion than in Germany (3%) and Belgium (7%) which stands in contrast to the general decline in OECD countries (OECD, 2008a). Increased responsibilities for immigrants Over the past few decades, the thrust of strategies to address the disadvantages confronted by immigrants in the Netherlands has evolved in important ways. In 1983, the White Paper on Minorities provided the basis for a so-called ethnic minorities policy. Strategies were premised on the notion of multi-culturalism and the objective of accommodating the diversity that accompanied the increase in the number of immigrants living in the Netherlands. Strategies aimed for emancipation and participation in society, reduction of social and economic disadvantage, and preventing and overcoming discrimination. In 1985, immigrants who had lived in the Netherlands for at least five years were granted certain voting rights. In 1989, the Scientific Council for Government Policy published a report that recommended a shift of objectives, downplaying the emphasis on accommodation and emphasising integration instead. It also recommended shifting the focus from migrant status, per se, to particular problems that hindered integration, such as weak language skills, low levels of education, and discrimination. In the years that followed, the government incorporated many of the key recommendations into policies that balanced rights with responsibilities, particularly with the obligation for immigrants to integrate into Dutch society. Compulsory language and civic integration courses were established for newly-arrived immigrants. The new approach also put in place affirmative action measures to pressure employers to hire immigrants and diversify their staffs, and strengthened the legal basis for immigrants to fight discrimination (OECD 2008a, pp ). The Civic Integration Act (passed in January 2007) heightens the importance of and requirements for immigrants to have sufficient skills in the Dutch language. The Act targets both new immigrants and established immigrants aged 18 to 65 meeting the following criteria: from countries outside the European Economic Agreement (EEA) area; with low command of the Dutch language; and who had not attended at least eight years of compulsory education in the Netherlands. Similarly, in the Flemish Community of Belgium, there are stricter demands for immigrants to improve their proficiency in Dutch and to accept

14 14 - CHAPTER 1: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANT AND MIGRANT EDUCATION Flemish societal values: certain benefits for adult immigrants are contingent upon their participation in language and civic courses. Immigrant population In 2008, 16% of young people (aged 0 to 20 years) in the Netherlands were immigrants from non- Western countries and roughly 70% of these originated from Turkey, Morocco, Surinam or the Antilles (Herweijer, 2009). In Germany, 27% of the population aged 25 or under has an immigrant background, including 9% originating from Turkey and 5% originating from other former countries of labour recruitment (Konsortium Bildungsberichterstattung, 2006). In the Flemish Community of Belgium in 2008/09, 8% of children in pre-primary and primary education did not speak either Dutch or French at home and 6% did not have Belgian nationality. The major immigrant groups originate from Turkey, Morocco, the Russian Federation and Serbia. Low educational attainment for immigrants is a strong barrier to labour market participation Foreign-born individuals in the Netherlands are less likely to be in the labour force. Although unemployment rates are comparatively low for all groups compared to in Germany and Belgium, they are still three times as high for foreign-born men than for native-born men (Figure 1.1). In all three systems, there are comparatively low employment rates for foreign-born women: only one in two of foreign-born women are employed in the Netherlands. Figure 1.1. Average employment/population ratio and unemployment rate By gender and place of birth Native-born men Native-born women Foreign-born men Foreign-born women Employment/population ratios Unemployment rates 10 0 Netherlands Belgium Germany Source : OECD, 2008a.

15 CHAPTER 1: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANT AND MIGRANT EDUCATION - 15 Evidence shows that low educational attainment is a strong barrier to labour market participation for immigrants. Table 1.1 compares employment rates of native and immigrant 20-to-29-year-olds according to their educational attainment. Employment rates are substantially lower for immigrants who do not have higher education qualifications and are particularly pronounced for second-generation immigrants who have not attained basic qualification at the upper secondary level. In all cases, the relative employment gaps between immigrants and natives by educational level are higher in the Netherlands than in the OECD on average. This is not a marginal issue: 47% of immigrants aged 15 to 64 years with non-western background have low levels of educational attainment (Table 1.2). Belgium Table 1.1. Employment rates by educational attainment Educational attainment Low Medium High Total Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Women Native born Second-generation immigrants First-generation immigrants Germany Native born Second-generation immigrants First-generation immigrants Netherlands Native born Second-generation immigrants n.a First-generation immigrants n.a OECD Native born Second-generation immigrants First-generation immigrants Note 1. Low indicates ISCED 2 or below; Medium indicates ISCED 3; High indicates ISCED 5 and 6. Source : OECD Migration statistics. Given the strong likelihood for immigrants with lower education to have weak labour market outcomes, the persistent problem of low attainment levels for non-western immigrant groups is particularly worrisome (Table 1.2). Analysis of attainment levels for the adult population overall (aged 15 to 64 years) compared to for young adults only (aged 25 to 34 years) indicates that the proportion of immigrants with very low attainment levels is declining, particularly for those with Western backgrounds. This is a positive development. Nonetheless, the absolute number of poorly qualified young adults with non-western immigrant background is still large 49% of younger Turkish and 39% of younger Moroccan immigrants have less than a basic qualification as currently defined. Regarding higher education, the proportion of some of the young adults from non-western immigrant groups with university qualifications is equal to that of the native Dutch.

16 16 - CHAPTER 1: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANT AND MIGRANT EDUCATION Source : Statistics Netherlands (StatLine). Table 1.2. Level of education for native Dutch and immigrants Educational attainment in percentage of population, to-64- year-olds Attained less than 'basic qualification' Total population Native Dutch Western immigrants Non-Western immigrants Turkish background Moroccan background Surinamese background Antillean background Other non-western background Attained university education Total population 9 14 Native Dutch 9 14 Western immigrants Non-Western immigrants 8 9 Turkish background 4 5 Moroccan background 3 3 Surinamese background 5 7 Antillean background 7 14 Other non-western background Attained higher professional education Total population Native Dutch Western immigrants Non-Western immigrants 9 14 Turkish background 6 11 Moroccan background 7 14 Surinamese background Antillean background Other non-western background to-34- year-olds Residential concentration of immigrants in the West and major cities Immigrants in particular with non-western backgrounds are to a great extent concentrated in the West of the Netherlands and mainly in the four cities of Rotterdam, Amsterdam, The Hague and Utrecht (Table 1.3). Table 1.3. Geographical distribution of non-western immigrants in the Netherlands Percentage of distribution across North, East, South and West, plus percentage in major cities (2008) North East South West 4 major cities Total population Non-Western immigrants Turkish background Moroccan background Surinamese background Antillean background Source : Statistics Netherlands (StatLine).

17 CHAPTER 1: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANT AND MIGRANT EDUCATION - 17 Languages Dutch is the language of instruction in compulsory and early childhood education in the Netherlands. However, in the province of Friesland primary and secondary schools are obliged to include the Frisian language in their educational programme. English is also part of the core objectives in primary education (SLO, 2007). Performance and participation in education and identification of priorities A comparison of selected systems The Netherlands is one of several systems within the OECD practising selection of children into different types of school or educational tracks at an early age according to their academic ability (Table 1.4). For the purposes of this section, comparisons will be drawn with Germany and the Flemish Community of Belgium. However, in general, there are limitations to the availability of information on immigrant students within these systems. As such, international evidence is presented to allow comparison of how immigrant students perform compared to native students in each system. 1 Wherever possible, more detailed national data are provided to allow analysis of different immigrant groups, in particular immigrants from non-western background. Table 1.4. Overview of selected education systems International enrolment data for 2007 Age range at which over 90% of the population is enrolled in education Age at which compulsory schooling starts Children enrolled aged 4 as a percentage of the population aged 4 Students aged 16 as a percentage of the population aged 16 Students aged 17 as a percentage of the population aged 17 Structural features First age of selection in the education system Austria % 91% 89% 10 4 Belgium % 100% 100% 12 4 Germany % 96% 92% 10 4 Netherlands % 98% 92% 12 6 United Kingdom /5 91% 90% 75% 16 1 Source : OECD, 2009 and the Education database; Herweijer, 2009; Konsortium Bildungsberichterstattung, Early childhood education and care (ECEC) Number of school types of distinct educational programmes available to 15 year olds International data show almost universal participation for four-year-olds in the Netherlands and Germany and for three- and four-year-olds in Belgium despite the fact that schooling is compulsory at a later age in all systems (Table 1.4). In the Netherlands, participation rates in preschool playgroups (for children aged 2.5 to 4 years) have been traditionally lower for children with Turkish, Moroccan, Surinamese and Antillean immigrant background (Table 1.5). However, this has increased over recent years for children of Turkish and Moroccan immigrant background and around a third of these children participated in targeted preschool and early school education programmes (VVE) in It is also a political priority in Germany to increase participation of children with immigrant background in preschool to stimulate language learning and social integration at an earlier age: 89% of native children and 84% of second-generation immigrant children attended preschool in 2004 (Konsortium Bildungsberichterstattung, 2006). For younger children, a similar pattern can be observed in the Flemish Community of Belgium: in 2004, 24% of children aged three months to three years whose mother did not have Belgian nationality when the child was born participated in ECEC compared to 63% of native children.

18 18 - CHAPTER 1: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANT AND MIGRANT EDUCATION Table 1.5. Participation in early childhood education and care (VVE) by immigrant group Percentages of children participating from 1996 to 2007 Turkey Morocco Suriname/Antilles Native Dutch low Native Dutch high Preschool playgroups Preschool and early-school education Note 1. For native Dutch children high and low refer to the highest level of education attained by either parent, where low represents no higher than ISCED level 2 (vmbo), and high represents at least ISCED 3 or higher (havo/vwo/ mbo or higher education). Data for 1996 and 1998 are based on small samples of immigrant parents and should be interpreted with caution. Source : Table 18 in Herweijer, 2009, supplemented from COOL 5 to 18. Looking back to earlier years, results from a recent survey of 18-to-35-year-old second-generation immigrants with a Turkish background show at least 90% of respondents in the Netherlands, Belgium and France had participated in ECEC by age four (Table 1.6). However, corresponding participation rates were much lower in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Table 1.6. Age of entry into education for second-generation Turkish immigrants Survey of 18-to-35-year-olds (2007/08) Percentage of 18-to-35-year-olds who reported being enrolled in education: Number of By age 3 By age 4 By age 5 individuals surveyed Austria 17% 41% 56% 458 Belgium 87% 93% 97% 582 France 90% 96% 99% 500 Germany 39% 67% 77% 490 Netherlands 13% 90% 97% 499 Sweden 53% 67% 80% 232 Switzerland 1% 12% 77% 464 Source : TIES survey 2007/08. Compulsory education Strong performance internationally in primary education for immigrant students despite relative disadvantage to native peers Primary school students in the Netherlands perform well internationally, including students with only one or neither parent born in the Netherlands (Table 1.7). This is also the case for students in the Flemish Community of Belgium and Germany. In all three systems, there are already pronounced performance differences between native and immigrant students. Indeed, more detailed national evidence for the Netherlands reveals a significant performance lag for non-western immigrant groups already in year two of primary school (Gijsberts and Herweijer, 2007). However, from 1988 to 2004, there has been steady progress in raising educational outcomes for primary school students from the non-western

19 CHAPTER 1: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANT AND MIGRANT EDUCATION - 19 immigrant groups, in particular students from Turkish and Moroccan background. In 2004/05, at the end of primary school, students from Turkish, Moroccan and Surinamese background had similar scores in arithmetic to native students whose parents have limited education. 2 International evidence shows that students in the Netherlands have greater scheduled opportunity to learn in schools compared to other OECD systems: schooling is compulsory in the Netherlands from the age of five (in contrast to age six in Belgium and Germany) and the majority of four-year-olds participate in early school education at primary schools; plus there is comparatively greater intended instruction time from ages 7 to 14 in primary and secondary education (Tables 1.4 and 1.8). 3 Table 1.7. Reading performance in the fourth grade of primary school Mean achievement scores in the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 2006 Native students Immigrant students Both parents born in country Only one parent born in country Neither parent born in country % of students Score % of students Score % of students Score Austria Belgium (Fl.) England France Germany Netherlands International average Source : IEA, Source : OECD, Table 1.8. Intended instruction time in primary and secondary education 2007 Average number of hours per year of total intended instruction time Ages 7 to 8 Ages 9 to 11 Ages 12 to 14 Austria Belgium (Fl.) England Germany Netherlands OECD average Early streaming lowers possibility for some immigrant groups to attend higher education At the end of primary education, when students are age 12, most schools administer a standard test developed by the National Institute for Test Development (CITO) to measure student performance although such a test is not compulsory. The outcome of this test, as well as the recommendation of the teacher (in consultation with the parents) combine to advise parents on the type of secondary school their child should attend. 4 Students enter either pre-vocational secondary education or general secondary education comprising a total of six different tracks: in pre-vocational secondary education (VMBO), either basic vocational, advanced vocational, combined vocational-theoretical or theoretical programmes; in general secondary education, either senior general secondary education (HAVO) or pre-university education (VWO), both being designed to give students direct access to higher education. National data show similar patterns of participation in academic and vocational tracks for native Dutch students and students with a Western immigrant background (Table 1.9). However, students with a non-western immigrant background are underrepresented in HAVO and VWO, the two tracks preparing for higher education: in 2008/09, 22% of students with a Turkish or Moroccan immigrant background and between

20 20 - CHAPTER 1: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANT AND MIGRANT EDUCATION 32 and 34% of students with a Surinamese or an Antillean immigrant background were enrolled in HAVO or VWO, compared to 48% of native Dutch students. But compared to native students, slightly larger proportions of students with a non-western immigrant background are also found in the highest vocational track, which is a possible route to higher education (via the second phase of senior general education). Students from Turkish, Moroccan and Antillean immigrant background are strongly overrepresented in the lowest vocational track (Table 1.9). Table 1.9. Participation in different educational tracks in the third grade of secondary education 2008/09 Percentage of students in each educational track Total all students Native Dutch Immigrant students Total Total Turkish Western non- Western Moroccan Surinamese Antillean Other non- Western General secondary education - with access to higher education Pre-university education (VWO) Senior general secondary education (HAVO) Combined HAVO/VWO Prevocational secondary education (VMBO) - with access to senior vocational education Theoretical track - with access to second phase of senior general education (HAVO) Combined vocationaltheoretical track Advanced vocational track Basic vocational track Source : Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 2009a. Immigrant students appear to be underrepresented in the higher academic tracks in other selective systems also although detailed data for these other systems are not available. In the Flemish Community of Belgium, students are selected into different school types at age 12, and those who do not speak Dutch at home represent 10% of students in the first year of academic education and 22% of students in the first year of vocational education. In Germany, students are selected into different school types as early as age ten. National analysis of PISA 2000 results suggests that while comparatively large proportions of students overall attend higher academic Grammar schools, certain immigrant groups are significantly underrepresented there: 33% of native students attended Grammar school, compared to 25% of immigrant students and only 13% of students with a Turkish immigrant background (Konsortium Bildungsberichterstattung, 2006). Improved performance internationally for immigrant students in the Netherlands, but persistent gaps International evidence shows that at age 15 there are significant performance differences on average between native students and immigrant students in the majority but not all of the OECD countries (OECD, 2007). Some of the most pronounced performance disadvantages in reading for second-generation immigrant students are observed in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Switzerland. However, both first- and second-generation immigrant students in the Netherlands show

21 CHAPTER 1: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANT AND MIGRANT EDUCATION - 21 better reading ability on average compared to their peers in the Flemish Community of Belgium and Germany (Table 1.10). Further, the relative performance gap in reading although still pronounced appears to have reduced in the Netherlands since the first PISA survey in Unfortunately, it is not possible to identify progress for particular immigrant groups within these international results, as the Netherlands did not choose to collect such data via the PISA survey. Such analysis would have been interesting as a comparison of results for immigrant students with a Turkish background reveals significant average performance differences among different education systems (OECD, 2006). 6 Table Reading performance at age 15 Mean score and scores at the 10 th, 25 th and 75 th percentiles of the performance distribution, PISA 2006 Belgium (Fl.) Average performance Bottom 10% of students score below: Bottom 25% of students score below: Native students Second-generation immigrant students First-generation immigrant students Germany Native students Second-generation immigrant students First-generation immigrant students Netherlands Native students Second-generation immigrant students First-generation immigrant students Source : OECD PISA 2006 database. Top 25% of students score at least: It is important to note that in the Netherlands, Germany and the Flemish Community of Belgium at least 25% of immigrant students perform around or above the OECD average on the PISA reading test (Table 1.10). However, among both the top and bottom performers on the test, native students outperform immigrant students in all three systems (although these gaps are more pronounced in the Flemish Community of Belgium). Less advantaged socio-economic background and not speaking Dutch at home are major educational challenges for immigrant students Much of these performance gaps are explained by students socio-economic background native students in all three systems have both higher average and less varied social, economic and cultural status but there are still significant performance differences even after taking account of this (Figures 1.2 and 1.3). The relative disadvantage in average socio-economic background is more pronounced for secondgeneration immigrant students than for first-generation immigrant students in all three systems. However, in the Netherlands this does not translate into lower average performance for second-generation immigrant students compared to first-generation immigrant students (Table 1.10). Generally, second-generation immigrant students in these systems have similar socio-economic composition although this is slightly higher on average in Germany. In contrast, there is a much wider range of socio-economic backgrounds among first-generation immigrant students in the Netherlands and the Flemish Community of Belgium compared to in Germany.

22 Native students Second-generation immigrant students First-generation immigrant students Native students Second-generation immigrant students First-generation immigrant students Native students Second-generation immigrant students First-generation immigrant students 22 - CHAPTER 1: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANT AND MIGRANT EDUCATION In the Netherlands and Germany, the language spoken at home is also an important factor and performance differences in reading at age 15 are no longer significant once this together with the students socio-economic background has been accounted for (Figure 1.3). Figure 1.2. Students' socio-economic background at age 15, by immigrant status Distribution on the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS), PISA 2006 Bars extend from the 5th to 95th percentiles Mean ESCS value 75th percentile 25th percentile 90th percentile 10th percentile Belgium (Fl.) Netherlands Germany Source: OECD PISA 2006 database.

23 CHAPTER 1: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES FOR IMMIGRANT AND MIGRANT EDUCATION - 23 Figure 1.3. Reading performance at age 15 and socio-economic and language differences Differences in reading performance by immigrant status, PISA 2006 Immigrant students have LOWER reading score than native students Netherlands Performance difference in reading Germany Accounting for students' socio-economic background Belgium (Fl.) Accounting for students' socio-economic background and language spoken at home Score point difference Note 1. Statistically significant differences are marked in a darker tone. Source : OECD PISA 2006 database. Immigrant students report investing time in learning outside of regular school lessons Results from PISA 2006 indicate that immigrant students in the Netherlands invest extra time learning Dutch outside of regular school lessons: around 60% report spending some time on out-of-school lessons in the language of instruction 7 each week higher than in both Germany and the Flemish Community of Belgium (Figure 1.4). In all three systems, immigrant students report spending more time learning the language of instruction in out-of-school lessons than their native counterparts. This stands in contrast to student reports of time spent learning the language of instruction in school, which do not vary so much among student groups. However, in general students in Germany report spending comparatively more time learning German in school. Reports by students in the Flemish Community of Belgium, indicate high variation among schools in provision of Dutch language lessons.